Our TV Shows

Got a Tip?

Call TMZ at (888) 847-9869 or Click Here

Willis Sues Paparazzo Over TMZ Story

6/19/2006 7:00 PM PDT BY TMZ STAFF

Bruce Willis outside of Hollywood restaurant KoiBruce Willis has filed suit against a Los Angeles paparazzo, claiming he lied when he told TMZ that the actor assaulted him outside a West Hollywood restaurant.

Anthony Goodrich told TMZ in a videotaped interview on June 14 that Willis smashed his camera into his face, causing a laceration to his nose and a chip to one of his teeth. 

In the lawsuit, filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court, Willis' lawyer, Marty Singer alleges that Goodrich and other "stalker-paparazzi," flashed high powered strobe lights in Willis' face as he was entering the restaurant.  The suit claims that Willis "put his hand up in front of his face to shield his eyes from the blinding flash."  The lawsuit goes on to allege that "Goodrich falsely stated that Willis stiff-armed Goodrich, shoved the photographer and pushed his camera into his face."

The suit claims that Goodrich "is a known stalker-paparazzi who makes a living by staking and confronting celebrities to take their photographs and otherwise attempts to incite some physical contact or outburst by the celebrity..."

The suit claims the TMZ article exposed Willis to "hatred, contempt, ridicule and obloquy..." He is seeking no less than $1 million in damages.

Goodrich filed a police report the day after the incident.  TMZ contacted the LAPD today and we were told that two days after filing the report, Goodrich "was re-interviewed and refused to prosecute so the case was closed."

Click to read the lawsuit


No Avatar


I hope the paparazzo now gets hit by Bruce Willis for real while Bruce stares into the camera and laughs.

3056 days ago


There's always two sides of a story and If I'm not mistaken there is damaging evidence in the form of video as Mr. Willis arriving and "shielding his eyes"
(Heck, I'd shield my eyes too if I was 87 years old...then again, I wouldn't leave the nursing home for sushi when I have a fridge full of pudding!) ...where, was I? Oh yeah shielding his eyes...
from the dangerous "High Powered Strobe Light". (which by the way is no different from the extreme and dangerous high powered super duper strobes that Sears uses when they take baby pictures)
Whether Mr. Willis made contact with the "stalker Paparazzi" by accident or on purpose...who by the way is standing outside a well known restaurant on a public sidewalk visited by real A stars, Mr. Willis is obligated to pay for any damages he caused...Oh and on another note I want my money back for "16 Blocks!!"

3056 days ago

scott andrews    

instead of a gun, this thug menaces with a camera...hardly what I'd define as "photographer"

3056 days ago


As far as I am concerned Bruce should have hit the leech. Paparazzi are nothing more than bloodsuckers trying to suck the life blood out of people who put themselves on-screen to entertain us, if you want to see your favorite star, look there, not into the windows of their living rooms. I personally would be LIVID if I were having my privacy constantly invaded by people, step back and think, how would you feel?

3056 days ago


The press has gotten completely out of hand! I hope Bruce did hit the trash and gets away with it. When will the madness stop? When is enough simply enough?

3056 days ago


Go Bruce.....nail him good. The paparazzi is WAY out of control.I hope you win the case!

3056 days ago

Christy Cox    

Go Bruce! Tuna your comments are pretty fishy. Are you "stalker-paparatso"????

3056 days ago


It's ridiculous. There isn't much dignity in this lawsuit. The paparazzo refused to prosecute. I think it should stop there.

3056 days ago


Paparazzi's are stalkers to the stars. I think with the high price these rags pay for pictures that they are also just as quilty of harrassment. Maybe if they would not pay such high prices for pictures it would calm these idiots down.
It has gotten out of hand.
People like this deserve a lawsuit against them and maybe they will think twice about their antics and the mags will not use their pictures.

3056 days ago

donna m    

I agree - yeah to Bruce. Just because you are a celebrity doesn't mean those photographers have a right to get right in their faces - that's why they invented telephoto lenses - duh?! As for Tuna #3 - sounds like you are a little jealous of the celebrities. No one deserves to be treated the way these celebrities are and they have a right to leave their houses and eat out just like you and I do. Put yourself in Bruce's shoes - you would have shielded your eyes too.

3056 days ago

Daniel Carlos de Oliveira    

hei Mr. Die hard, don't stop, keep walking, and smille, in brazil we love you

3056 days ago

Marie Austin    

I think the stars have every right to protect their privacy. I know all of us like to see them just being "regular" people, but everyone deserves privacy!! Just look what happened to Princess Diana---all for a few pictures!!

3056 days ago

Shane Gritzinger    

4 words people - Freedom Of The Press

Look if Bruce didnt want the flaws that come with tthe price of fame then he should have been a used car salesman.

I wouldnt be surprised if Bruces Publicity people havent created this hype for him - Dosent he have a movie coming out that hes promoting? What great timing for a lawsuit and more self indulgent shallow self promotion.
you go Bruce - i hope this sells more movie tickets for you.

3056 days ago


"(instead of a gun, this thug menaces with a camera...hardly what I'd define as "photographer")"...agreed.

3056 days ago

Rita Magadieu    

Get in Bruce! Lash with the mouth and not phyical violence, good for you.

3056 days ago
| 1 | 2 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

Around The Web